'Body Of Work' Bond Actor Reviews/Ranking

chrisisall

This is NOT who is your favourite actor, or what are your favourite films, but rather judge the actor's body of work on many factors including diversity of stories, tones, production in general, actor characterization, music- the whole deal.

Here's my ranking:

#1 Connery- his movies are so rich in production, lush music, and varied tones & stories. This group of Bond movies, as a body of work, might never be equalled.

#2 Craig- while I won't pretend that Craig is my second favourite actor, I have to rank his body of work in these movies at #2 simply for the lavish productions, the extremely varied tones, and the fierce commitment of Craig himself to these projects.

#3 Brosnan- from quite serious (GE) to absolutely OTT (DAD) this group has the greatest tonal diversity of the lot IMO. Inconsistent stories, yet vastly entertaining as a section in the series.

#4 Moore- Some might site the greatest diversity in his long run, but there was a 'similarness' in most of his movies IMO- a smirky playboy quality that he only occasionally broke free of (but when he did it was glorious). Production and music-wise, there is wide variation, and I was tempted to switch 3 & 4 here if not for Brosnan's overall more serious take on the character of Bond & generally higher production value on his films.

#5 Dalton- My favourite Bond in my two favourite Bond movies, yet as a body of work given the parameters I set in place above, I can't possibly rate it any higher.

#6 Lazenby- No matter that it's one of the best Bond movies of the Sixties, it's just one movie.

So, how would you rate them?

Firemass

chrisisall wrote:

This is NOT who is your favourite actor

#4 Moore- Some might site the greatest diversity in his long run, but there was a 'similarness' in most of his movies IMO- a smirky playboy quality that he only occasionally broke free of...

I've noticed this "quality" in parts of Moonraker such as the hotel room with Manuela, but overall I'd say it was a rare occurrence in Moore's Bond. (and not the other way around)

Anyway:

Connery basically did it all..from the early Fleming-esqe films of Dr. No and FRWL to the blockbusters of Goldfinger and Thunderball to the over-the-top sci-fi of YOLT and the campy comedy of DAF.

Moore gets 2nd place: Started out as low budget campy Guy Hamilton Films and then progressed to the mega-budget epics TSWLM and MR. Then went back to Fleming in the 80's for the down-to-earth FYEO.
Octopussy and AVTAK are both pure Bond films in terms of perfecting the formula and shying away from outside influence.

Brosnan was rock solid as Bond and his first 3 films are pretty similar in tone with D.A.D being the WTF wildcard.

Dalton only did 2 films of course, but made a big impact with the hardcore Bond fans. Unfortunately, the general public couldn't care less about him.

We'll have to wait and see how Craig's "body of work" continues to unfold....

chrisisall

Firemass wrote:

I've noticed this "quality" in parts of Moonraker such as the hotel room with Manuela, but overall I'd say it was a rare occurrence in Moore's Bond. (and not the other way around)

I can completely accept this because this is a subjective thread all about your overall impressions of the bodies of work, not facts or numbers.
In fact, I love hearing differing views on this! -{

Thunderpussy

First of all great idea for a topic chrisisall. -{

For me Connery would be Number One. a great range of Emotions and scenes showing
how much of a range he has.
Brosnan, next. equal with Dalton. I'd say Craig would be Next and hope he gets to do
something with a little more range than angry and revenge, Skyfall was a good step in
that direction.
Moore ( Much as I like him ) was a more limited actor and in many ways played himself
playing Bond. Lastly Lazenby, I enjoyed him in OHMSS and think he could of improved
for future films. Although we'll never know.

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

Brosnan, next. equal with Dalton.

On a purely "I love these guys!" level, I would agree. -{

Blackleiter

chrisisall wrote:

This is NOT who is your favourite actor, or what are your favourite films, but rather judge the actor's body of work on many factors including diversity of stories, tones, production in general, actor characterization, music- the whole deal.

Here's my ranking:

#1 Connery- his movies are so rich in production, lush music, and varied tones & stories. This group of Bond movies, as a body of work, might never be equalled.

#2 Craig- while I won't pretend that Craig is my second favourite actor, I have to rank his body of work in these movies at #2 simply for the lavish productions, the extremely varied tones, and the fierce commitment of Craig himself to these projects.

#3 Brosnan- from quite serious (GE) to absolutely OTT (DAD) this group has the greatest tonal diversity of the lot IMO. Inconsistent stories, yet vastly entertaining as a section in the series.

#4 Moore- Some might site the greatest diversity in his long run, but there was a 'similarness' in most of his movies IMO- a smirky playboy quality that he only occasionally broke free of (but when he did it was glorious). Production and music-wise, there is wide variation, and I was tempted to switch 3 & 4 here if not for Brosnan's overall more serious take on the character of Bond & generally higher production value on his films.

#5 Dalton- My favourite Bond in my two favourite Bond movies, yet as a body of work given the parameters I set in place above, I can't possibly rate it any higher.

#6 Lazenby- No matter that it's one of the best Bond movies of the Sixties, it's just one movie.

So, how would you rate them?

Maybe I shouldn't chime in on this one since you are seeking a diversity of opinion, but I find myself in agreement with your rankings and your reasoning. Go figure! )

Thunderpussy

What's this People agreeing with each other on AJB,

chrisisall

Blackleiter wrote:

Maybe I shouldn't chime in on this one since you are seeking a diversity of opinion, but I find myself in agreement with your rankings and your reasoning. Go figure! )

Chiming in is always good when it's you, BL!
I thought I'd step out of my box & see what happened.

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

What's this People agreeing with each other on AJB,

It's... well, I think it's allowed... ?:)
)

Thunderpussy

I'm not so sure, I'll have to check the rules. :007)

Blackleiter

Thunderpussy wrote:

What's this People agreeing with each other on AJB,

How dare you disagree with me agreeing with Chris! See there - disagreement in the air! That's the AJB Way! Better? )

Thunderpussy

That's better, It wouldn't feel right with some argument breaking out. )
Still I wonder who'll be brave enought Not to place Connery in the top spot ?

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

Still I wonder who'll be brave enough Not to place Connery in the top spot ?

I could conceive of a severe Moore fan doing so...

Peppermill

Blackleiter wrote:

Thunderpussy wrote:

What's this People agreeing with each other on AJB,

How dare you disagree with me agreeing with Chris! See there - disagreement in the air! That's the AJB Way! Better? )

I do not agree that you agree when you disagree to agree.... wait... I've gone cross eyed!

Although Lazenby only did one film he did portray the biggest range in one movie. The one liners, the womanizing (8.30, 9, 9.30) But also some of the most character driven and most intense scenes ever in a Bond movie.

Moore is one of my favorite Bonds and he (fortunately) did get a few chances to show he was more than a raised eyebrow and a witty line.

Connery is just amazing. He defined Bond and between DN and DAF there is almost everything that makes Bond Bond.

Dalton is great actor, but he didn't get the one liners down.

Brosnan might be the winner for me. He was a blend of everything Bond. Moore's aloofness, Connery's suave, Daltons hard edge and Lazenby's teary eye....

Barbel

chrisisall wrote:

Thunderpussy wrote:

What's this People agreeing with each other on AJB,

It's... well, I think it's allowed... ?:)
)

Er... I agree )

Both with people agreeing with each other, and with chrisisall's original list.

Peppermill

chrisisall wrote:

Thunderpussy wrote:

Still I wonder who'll be brave enough Not to place Connery in the top spot ?

I could conceive of a severe Moore fan doing so...

So yeah, I did it! Forza Brosnan, the ultimate cookie cutter Bond!

chrisisall

Peppermill wrote:

So yeah, I did it! Forza Brosnan, the ultimate cookie cutter Bond!

Yes, very brave!
You DO have a Kevlar vest on now, right? )
FWIW, I love Broz. :007)

Barbel

chrisisall wrote:

FWIW, I love Broz. :007)

You're not alone. -{

Thunderpussy

Barbel wrote :

You're not alone. -{

But there is Plenty of room left in the phone box.

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

chrisisall wrote:

FWIW, I love Broz. :007)

You're not alone. -{

Thanks, BB!!

Barbel

Na, that's just revisionist bollox, TP. Brosnan was very popular as 007, and very few of the faults found in his very successful run of films are down to him.

Thunderpussy

He's up there with Dalton On my list at #2. -{
and As many have pointed out, He had very little to work with, which
was a shame.

Barbel

That's true; there was always the sense that he wanted to go further with Bond than he was allowed to. Still, in 1995 he was definitely The Man For The Job given that Dalton had jumped (or was pushed, but that's a different can of worms).

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

That's true; there was always the sense that he wanted to go further with Bond than he was allowed to.

"Peel back the layers" as it were... -{

Thunderpussy

In many ways I think PB wanted to do what they eventually did with DC.
Make Bond a more Human character with "Inner demons " which he mentioned
in an early Press call.

Firemass

chrisisall wrote:

This is NOT who is your favourite actor, or what are your favourite films, but rather judge the actor's body of work on many factors including diversity of stories, tones, production in general, actor characterization, music- the whole deal.

Excellent post BTW. -{

Just wanted to mention that "stories, production, music, the whole deal" is much bigger scope than just a particular actor's range of emotion. I noticed some of you (Peppermill ) were focusing mainly on Bond's acting abilities.

Thunderpussy

I don't think even taking Music etc in to account It would change my list.
As I have Connery at Number One. IMHO his fims have the Best Music &
sets as well. )

007bond

Thunderpussy wrote:

In many ways I think PB wanted to do what they eventually did with DC.
Make Bond a more Human character with "Inner demons " which he mentioned
in an early Press call.

Brosnan is half the actor Craig is and wouldn't and couldn't be able to carry that off. That's how good Craig is.
He's by the far the best actor to have played Bond (I'm not saying he's the best Bond but he's the definitely the best actor)
He's bought Bond back as the main focus that we haven't seen since Connery first two films.

Thunderpussy

I'm getting the feeling you're a big DC fan, 007Bond. :-)

Jarvio

1 - Connery - Not my favourite group of films, but I have to agree that his films did introduce a lot of varied aspects. DN was a great introduction and kinda fun, FRWL was very fleming-esque, GF obviously set the bond formula into shape. TB was big-budget, and YOLT and DAF had different tones altogether, especially DAF. And let's not forget SPECTRE - SPECTRE was a staple in the Connery films, and a defining theme throughout. And some of the most defining bond girls were in this era too - Honey, Tatiana, Pussy.

2 - Moore - I'm a huge Moore fan as we all know. But I even think his body of work has to be rated highly too. Sure, in most cases he does just 'play himself' as bond, but I do find his films quite varied in their own ways - LALD seemed like a lower-budget bond film, but awesome all the way, with unique voodoo aspects. TMWTGG had similar tones of LALD IMO, although Moore himself seemed more brutal. Then came TSWLM, a huge blockbuster. Then MR, another huge blockbuster, and even though MR is my least favourite of all, it does indeed offer diversity to Moore's time as bond. FYEO was very down-to-earth, OP had more comic elements, and AVTAK seemed like a great balance. Moore's time as bond also spawned some of the most memorable villains - Zorin, Scaramanga, Jaws, Baron Samedi, Mayday, Drax etc.

3 - Craig - CR and QOS are not so much my cup of tea, although I love SF. But overall, Craig's films have felt the most different of all. IMO they have the most unique tone out of all bond films, and are sometimes on the verge of 'drama' more than the rest. They are dark, sombre, and have more of an artistic tone. Far less episodic, and in a way, more daring.

4 -Dalton - Again, his two films were dark. However, they were also action-packed and episodic, and so I found them to be more 'bond-like' than Craigs, which, whilst unique, made them less unique than Craig's IMO. Just for the record though, I love TD's two bond films, and much prefer his films to Craig's overall. Dalton really should have done more. But the fact is he only did 2, so not much more room to develop with.

5 - Brosnan - I found Brosnan's tenure to be the least varied tbh. GE was fantastic, and had a much fresher tone than previous movies, maybe due to the 6-year gap. The end of the cold war enabled a new take on things. GE was fresh, action-packed, and different. But then came TND and TWINE, which, IMO, are just lesser GE's. Not much variation there. And then came DAD - even though DAD is different due to it's over-the-top-ness, I still find it to be simultaneously similar to his first 3 - Heavily dependent on action and gadgets. Sure, DAD took this too far, but the basic premise is still the same IMO. So, even though Brosnan saved and 'updated' the franchise, I felt there was a lack of variety overall.

6 - Lazenby - As mentioned, 1 film is just not a 'body of work'.

007bond

Thunderpussy wrote:

I'm getting the feeling you're a big DC fan, 007Bond. :-)

how did you guess pussy ). Was never a massive Bond fan until CR which blew my mind and then QoS sealed it for me. Craig is the man but he's a wonderful actor (Our Friends in the North is his greatest work)